IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fip/fedker/y2010iqivp67-96nv.95no.4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are U.S. states equally prepared for a carbon-constrained world?

Author

Listed:
  • Amy A. Jones
  • Mark C. Snead

Abstract

Climate concerns linked to greenhouse gas emissions, particularly carbon dioxide (CO2), have taken center stage in the national energy policy debate. Domestic energy use and carbon emissions continue to rise, and forecasts suggest further increases under the existing regulatory structure. However, heightened international and domestic pressure to reduce U.S. carbon emissions suggests that additional changes to the regulatory framework are probable in coming years. ; Reducing U.S. carbon emissions will likely require a comprehensive national framework that will alter the pattern of energy use and production in all 50 states. At issue for state-level policymakers is that carbon restrictions are unlikely to affect the states equally. Energy use and emission patterns vary widely across states, and there is no accepted framework for allocating shares of a national carbon reduction goal. As a result, states that emit the most carbon or have the most energy- and carbon-intensive economies may shoulder the greatest burden. ; Snead and Jones evaluate the current energy posture of the states and thus how prepared they are to cope with ongoing trends in energy use, especially restrictions on carbon emissions. Their findings suggest that the New England, Mid-Atlantic and West Coast states are generally best prepared. These states have the least energy-intensive economies and use fuel mixes with low average carbon intensity; hence, they already release proportionately less CO2. The states expected to be hardest hit by carbon constraints are the traditional energy-producing and agricultural states. These states have energy-intensive economies, by both domestic and international standards, and will face a considerable challenge in altering their energy use and emissions patterns.

Suggested Citation

  • Amy A. Jones & Mark C. Snead, 2010. "Are U.S. states equally prepared for a carbon-constrained world?," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, vol. 95(Q IV), pages 67-96.
  • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedker:y:2010:i:qiv:p:67-96:n:v.95no.4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.kansascityfed.org/documents/943/2010-Are%20U.S.%20States%20Equally%20Prepared%20for%20a%20Carbon-Constrained%20World%3F.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin I. Hoffert & Ken Caldeira & Atul K. Jain & Erik F. Haites & L. D. Danny Harvey & Seth D. Potter & Michael E. Schlesinger & Stephen H. Schneider & Robert G. Watts & Tom M. L. Wigley & Donald J. , 1998. "Energy implications of future stabilization of atmospheric CO2 content," Nature, Nature, vol. 395(6705), pages 881-884, October.
    2. Stern, David I., 2004. "The Rise and Fall of the Environmental Kuznets Curve," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1419-1439, August.
    3. Joseph E. Aldy, 2007. "Energy and Carbon Dynamics at Advanced Stages of Development: An Analysis of the U.S. States, 1960-1999," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 91-112.
    4. David G. Terkla & Peter B. Doeringer, 1991. "Explaining variations in employment growth: Structural and cyclical change among states and local areas," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 329-348, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Davidsdottir, B. & Fisher, M., 2011. "The odd couple: The relationship between state economic performance and carbon emissions economic intensity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 4551-4562, August.
    2. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Francesco Nicolli & Dario Biolcati Rinaldi, 2012. "Multi-Tasking in the Waste Realm.Theoretical and Empirical Insights on Management and Disposal Performances," EuroEconomica, Danubius University of Galati, issue 5(31), pages 88-101, December.
    3. Fujii, Hidemichi & Managi, Shunsuke, 2013. "Which industry is greener? An empirical study of nine industries in OECD countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 381-388.
    4. Fankhauser, Samuel & Jotzo, Frank, 2017. "Economic growth and development with low-carbon energy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 86850, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Song, Tao & Zheng, Tingguo & Tong, Lianjun, 2008. "An empirical test of the environmental Kuznets curve in China: A panel cointegration approach," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 381-392, September.
    6. Kaika, Dimitra & Zervas, Efthimios, 2013. "The environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) theory. Part B: Critical issues," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1403-1411.
    7. Touitou Mohammed, 2021. "Empirical Analysis of the Environmental Kuznets Curve for Economic Growth and CO2 Emissions in North African Countries," Econometrics. Advances in Applied Data Analysis, Sciendo, vol. 25(2), pages 67-77, June.
    8. Yue, Shen & Munir, Irfan Ullah & Hyder, Shabir & Nassani, Abdelmohsen A. & Qazi Abro, Muhammad Moinuddin & Zaman, Khalid, 2020. "Sustainable food production, forest biodiversity and mineral pricing: Interconnected global issues," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    9. Esposito, Piero & Patriarca, Fabrizio & Salvati, Luca, 2018. "Tertiarization and land use change: The case of Italy," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 80-86.
    10. Francesco Nicolli & Francesco Vona & Lionel Nesta, 2012. "Determinants of Renewable Energy Innovation: Environmental Policies vs. Market Regulation," Working Papers 201204, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
    11. Honma, Satoshi, 2012. "Environmental and economic efficiencies in the Asia-Pacific region," MPRA Paper 43361, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Sebri, Maamar, 2009. "La Zone Méditerranéenne Face à la Pollution de L’air : Une Investigation Econométrique [The Mediterranean Zone in front of Air pollution: an Econometric Investigation]," MPRA Paper 32382, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Sinha, Avik & Shahbaz, Muhammad, 2018. "Estimation of Environmental Kuznets Curve for CO2 emission: Role of renewable energy generation in India," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 703-711.
    14. Daniel Fiorino, 2011. "Explaining national environmental performance: approaches, evidence, and implications," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 44(4), pages 367-389, November.
    15. Stern, David I. & Gerlagh, Reyer & Burke, Paul J., 2017. "Modeling the emissions–income relationship using long-run growth rates," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(6), pages 699-724, December.
    16. DeCanio, Stephen J. & Fremstad, Anders, 2011. "Economic feasibility of the path to zero net carbon emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1144-1153, March.
    17. Stefan Ederer & Stefan Weingärtner, 2014. "Structural Disparities in Carbon Dioxide Consumption and Trade in the World Economy. WWWforEurope Policy Paper No. 16," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 47498.
    18. Ilpo Kojola & Ville Hallikainen & Timo Helle & Jon E Swenson, 2018. "Can only poorer European countries afford large carnivores?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-9, April.
    19. Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Montini, Anna & Zoboli, Roberto, 2006. "Municipal Waste Production, Economic Drivers, and 'New' Waste Policies: EKC Evidence from Italian Regional and Provincial Panel Data," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 12053, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    20. C. Seri & A. de Juan Fernandez, 2021. "The relationship between economic growth and environment. Testing the EKC hypothesis for Latin American countries," Papers 2105.11405, arXiv.org.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fip:fedker:y:2010:i:qiv:p:67-96:n:v.95no.4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Zach Kastens (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbkcus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.